Review-Journal, AP file motion for legal fees

LAS VEGAS - CORRECTION: 8 News Now wants to correct a story reported on Thursday, July 19 about the Review-Journal and Associated Press filing a motion against the widow of 1 October victim Metro Police Officer Charleston Hartfield to pay their legal fees. (Original story below)

While the two news outlets made the motion against Veronica Hartfield, the motion is asking her attorney Tony Sgro to pay the costs.

The following is an except from the motion:

This case meets both of the alternative grounds for holding Mr. Sgro (and other counsel for the Haiifield Parties) personally liable for any fees and costs this Court may grant. As recognized in the Anti-SLAPP Order,6 the case was never well-grounded in fact or law, and Mr. Sgro unreasonably extended this action by refusing to voluntarily dismiss his client's claims despite knowing, and admitting, that relief was impossible. Furthermore, in determining whether Mr. Sgro should be held personally responsible, this Court should liberally construe the provisions of Nev. Rev. Stat.§ 7.085 in favor of holding Mr. Sgro and his firm personally liable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Two news outlets are asking the widow of 1 October victim, Metro Police Officer Charleston Hartfield, to pay their legal fees.

This stems from the case of the release of 1 October autopsy reports.

It all started with the release of victims autopsy records in January 2018 after a lawsuit by the Review-Journal and the Associated Press. One of the autopsies, was Hartfield's.

Hartfield, who was off-duty, was killed while attending the concert. His widow, Veronica sued to keep his autopsy from being released.

The judge then issued a gag order asked the Review-Journal to return Hartfield's autopsy. Her attorney says using the information is unnecessary and goes past the limit of the First Amendment.

The lawyer representing the Review-Journal, Maggie McLetchie, says this was all unconstitutional. She's also representing the Associated Press, but she's only speaking on behalf of the Review-Journal right now.